Love him or hate him, I think Edwards has momentum going into Iowa.

[PresidentObama]

The endorsement of the Iowan first lady. The wonderful cover of Newsweek. All his appearances on the Sunday morning shows looking optimistic and talking about shaking up Washington and restoring our democracy to the American people. He said himself his crowds are getting large with overflow. His tough anti-corporate rhetoric is striking well with Iowans, and his "American Rising" is connecting. Even his critics will tell you he's very well organized in Iowa, and has the advantage in Iowas rural areas. His supporters and staff are very well trained, and again very organized. He's got a lot of left over support from 2004, and his main crop of supporters are caucus goers that are more likely, statistically, to come out and caucus. He's got strong support in the all important second choice candidate department, and his last ditch effort to come off as hopeful and optimistic is smart strategy in my book. He's pulling the same strategy that got him a strong second place finish in Iowa in 2004 when Dean and Gephardt were going back and forth. This time it's Obama and Hillary.

Whether you love. Or you hate him. Edwards has momentum in Iowa.

Beyond that is up for debate, but one things for sure...in Iowa, Newsweek had it right.

He is 'The Sleeper'

Go Johnny boy, go!!

[forsberg]

1. A week ago I thought he'd be a surprise second

Much like 04 when he came within 6 points of Kerry (and likely the nomination)

I think Obama and Hillary might both devour each other, Edwards will be the last man standing.

[JeffR]

2. I believe he does

and godspeed John Edwards. Anything to rescue this race from its nominal frontrunners, who continue to disappoint daily.

Oh, and Go Dennis!

[saracat]

3. Edwards is going to win!And he is going to win the nomination if the Dems have any sense at all!

[Nutmegger]

4. Get ready for the exploding heads.

Because John Edwards will surprise all!

Everyone will be talking about it. How could this happen? Just how could the M$M get it so wrong?

John Edwards 2008!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. I'm starting to think he might win Iowa. Every little "inside politics" angle

seems to favor him... the over-weighting of rural caucus sites, the 15% rule, the distractions around Jan 3rd...

And the fact that Clinton might be assisting him intentionally doesn't hurt.

It could happen.

[lisainmilo]

7. I sure do hope so!

:applause:

[FlyingSquirrel]

6. Cherry Creek News looks favorably on him (and Obama) December 15

http://www.thecherrycreeknews.com/content/view/2152/2/

Hillary Clinton—I cringed when her chief strategist and my polling colleague, Mark Penn, wrote a 350-page memo several months ago declaring her to be inevitable as the next President of the United States. It was the wrong message for a number of reasons.

First, it raised expectations way too high, so she was left running against herself and, secondly, it sounded horribly arrogant, which I still think it was. Number three, it misunderstood—then and now—the genuine anger that voters feel and their willingness to take it out on some of the best-known candidates. Finally, one thing I know about Iowa voters is that they don't like to be told whom they're going to vote for. It is not over, but let me restate here what I've been suggesting in columns, speeches, and media appearances for a couple of months—Sen. Clinton could come in third in Iowa. Thus, arguably the best-known presidential candidate in American history has a ceiling of 25% to 29% in Iowa. Not likely to bring those numbers up, she has tried to go negative at Obama to bring his numbers down. It seems to be backfiring on her.


Barack Obama—Hope and change seem to be what Americans are looking for. They are troubled by Obama's lack of experience and youth, but so far of any of the Democratic candidates, he has the strongest appeal among moderates and Independents in both the primaries and the general election. Will he get lost in the back and forth with Clinton and get damaged in the process? So far it doesn't look like it. Right now he's the odds-on favorite in Iowa and several early states that follow and his numbers seem to improve every day. Also, he does better against any of the leading Republicans than any other Democrat. He can survive a second-place showing in Iowa...if the winner is Edwards.


John Edwards—He could gain the most from the Hillary-Obama drama. We know that John Edwards has honed a very popular message. It worked well for him in 2004, the notion of "Two Americas" that includes an alienated, anxiety-ridden middle class as well. Edwards is the best natural stump speaker of the three candidates and his audiences are large, and they like him. His message at the moment of economic populism is probably too hot for the general election, but he can modulate that should he secure the nomination. His biggest problem is a lack of money. Others have suggested that his other problem may be just gaining attention, as Hillary and Obama suck up the oxygen. However, Edwards has maintained his support in the low 20s, he knows this caucus system, and he is a very popular second choice among supporters of also-ran candidates who will not meet the 15 percent "viability" standard. So this remains very much a three-way race. Edwards does not have as much money as Clinton and Obama, but a victory in Iowa could help him enormously in that regard. He also has one of the best Internet fund-raisers in Howard Dean's strategist, Joe Trippi. And for those north of the Mason-Dixon Line who doubt the sincerity of his Southern drawl, the same was said of Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton—the last three Democratic presidents.


Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel—We're starting too see some evidence of interest in Joe Biden's candidacy as Clinton fades a little. If Biden can jump up to 15 percent, he could gain more attention than the number-three finisher and bill himself as the seasoned candidate who can go the distance. The same can be said for Bill Richardson. None of the other candidates, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel, show any promise whatsoever.

[K Gardner]

10. Wow.. I *love* this article ! Hadn't seen it before, thanks for posting !

[Eurobabe]

8. I think Edwards will win Iowa

He's my second choice, I think. :shrug:

[FlyingSquirrel]

9. Key Point about the Iowa Caucus system

'Edwards ... is a very popular second choice among supporters of also-ran candidates who will not meet the 15 percent "viability" standard.'

In other words, anyone who doesn't hit 15%, their second choice candidate gets their votes. How many Kucinich, Richardson, Dodd supporters do you think are going to put Clinton as their second choice?

[Eurobabe]

13. As is Biden, look for him to place higher than polls indicate n/t

[CountAllVotes]

11. I like Edwards

I may very well vote for him. I'm not a fan of Sen. Obama nor Sen. Clinton. I think Edwards is a little more real and has appeal to many persons out there.

:kick:

[asdjrocky]

12. He has run a nearly flawless campaign. nt

[PresidentObama]

14. Not quite. He's made some mistakes. But he's been able to manuever through all the bullshit.

And looks strong and confident in the end.

Clinton looks paranoid with the recent poll numbers. And Obama looks determined to maintain his lead, and is battling Hillary and her attacks.

Edwards looks to be above the fray, and focused on getting out his optimistic and hopeful message and vision to voters.

I think in the end, Edwards WILL win Iowa!!

And the rest will be history. We'll see what happens after Iowa.

But as it gets closer, the more optimistic I become.

[asdjrocky]

15. Not perfect, no.

That's why I say "nearly flawless." If you look at the last few months, that hard to argue objectively, and, his timing, at least has been excellent.

And he's been first out with just about every statement, on every issue.

[MonkeyFunk]

16. Perhaps

doesn't seem to be showing up in the polls yet, but there's still time.

[PresidentObama]

18. You're right, he has no leads in Iowan polls.

But he's steady.

[TeamJordan23]

17. The problem with Edwards. If he wins Iowa, than what?

He is not running strong in NH or SC. It is tough to say he wins either even with the momentum from IA.

[flyarm]

21. yes well they said that about Kerry as well!..and hillary's people are acting like..well

Edwards helps hillary..bullshit..Edwards helps Edwards if he wins and i believe he will win Iowa!

then he becomes a media darling..and it is such a short time period between Iowa and NH
fly

[Arugula Latte]

19. I'm feeling a small flicker of optimism.

I'd love Edwards him to crush Hillary. If Edwards can't, then I hope Obama can.

I'd love to see that over-confident, How-Dare-You-Question-My-Inevitability smirk wiped off her face.

[Diamond Dave]

20. I am an Edwards fan. He made his living fighting corporations that had

hurt people.

www.reclaimdemocracy.org

I would sure like to know who Granny D is supporting about now.

I appreciate that he says he is sorry for his vote on Iraq, it is still hard to get past the "if I knew then what I know now" part of the rhetoric. Hell we all knew it then. Why didn't they in Congress? I call BS on that one. Kucinich is number in our book, but hell, we all know he is "unelectable", he is too short, too elfen like, etc, etc...... What's next? Who knows?

Peace.

[weeve]

22. It would be a shame ...

... if this all came down to MONEY, and the candidiate who's sucked up the most from Lobbyists (they're people too) , would win based just on that, or the number of TV commercials they can buy, etc.

Is that what our democracy has become ? SOLD to the highest bought-and-paid-for-bidder ??

Democrats who are truly concerned that it's imperative that a DEMOCRAT must win the White House in '08, must stop living in this wish-fulfillment fantasy land and get behind Edwards, and get behind him before it's TOO LATE.
I do want a female President. I do want a black President. But in 2008, I NEED a Democrat President. This is no time for "FIRSTS", I hate to say. Not with a potential 8-1 conservative Supreme Court (for decades) in the making should a Republican win. The rightwing media is just chomping at the bit to get Hillary or Obama as the nominee. John Edwards was already vetted in '04.And has only been more on point since. If anyone's message is trending to the LEFT, it's his. And that's a GOOD THING last time I checked ? He's the Democrat to win the White House (with coattails) , and Progressive to boot. Which is EXACTLY what this country needs after 8 years of Bush/Cheney. And he'll win.

But wouldn't that be just typical of Democrats, trying to make a "statement", and believing what the Corporate Media tells them ... that they'd yet again pass over an almost guaranteed WINNER, for the machine/money/mojo/media candidate instead . They don't want Edwards. YOU SHOULD !! (For all the right reasons.)

Can we all take a step back, breathe deep, look at the big picture ... and DO THE RIGHT THING ? For once ?

We may not get another chance anytime soon. ( 30 years of upcoming Conservative Supreme Court decisions ? Thank you NO ... I'll raise my children elsewhere. ) The time is NOW to get behind JOHN EDWARDS in a big way . Spread the word ... talk him up ... send $$ ... do whatever you can.

It's ummm , kind of IMPORTANT this time ?

[Caseman]

23. That's why I support Senator Joe Biden...

...even though he foolishly voted for the Iraq war, he is here now with a plan for our withdrawal and offers a political solution to the region. And unlike the top tier candidates, he is not bounded by interest groups and has the little campaign money to show for it. He could/should/will be our next great president.

[weeve]

24. 2/3 RIGHT

Yes, Joe could/should ... but like Dennis Kucinich, I kind of doubt that he WILL be the next Preident.

So, that leaves Hillary, Obama, and Edwards.

I'll go with the most progressive of those three ... the most electable ( we really NEED a DEM President this time ) ...


... JOHN EDWARDS !!

[Caseman]

25. He can never win when everyone has the same perspective like you...

...but people like me will still cheer and promote their candidate despite their "chances" of winning. It's a democracy, not a popularity contest.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. but

democracy pretty much IS a popularity contest. People vote for their favorite.

[Caseman]

31. By 'popularity contest'...

...I meant 'media-driven'. But I guess that is what we basically got today, which is sad. I just enjoy my dreams of a political world based on... politics.

[Vinca]

26. I like Edwards. In fact, one quandary of being a Democrat this year

is that the vast majority of our candidates would do a fine job as POTUS. I could go either Obama or Edwards in New Hampshire.

[durrrty libby]

28. As long as he helps Hillary get the nom, I don't care what he does

[PresidentObama]

30. That's doubtful.

[youthere]

29. We've been saying this for months in the Iowa forum...

It's nearly unanimous among Iowa DU'ers...Edwards will win Iowa. He has enormous popularity here.